You are at netAirspace : Forum : Air and Space Forums : Civil Aviation

UA Commits To Buying 15 Boom Supersonics

All about Airlines and Airliners.
 

DXing 03 Jun 21, 11:51Post
Will it become a reality? I doubt it will happen by the current projected date but anything is possible.......

Under the terms of the agreement, United will purchase 15 of Boom's 'Overture' airliners, once Overture meets United's demanding safety, operating and sustainability requirements, with an option for an additional 35 aircraft.

It is slated to roll out in 2025, fly in 2026 and expected to carry passengers by 2029. United and Boom will also work together to accelerate production of greater supplies of SAF.



https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/united-adding-supersonic-speeds-with-new-agreement-to-buy-aircraft-from-boom-supersonic-1030490710

Willing to be non-rev travel will be restricted and OAL will be embargoed.
What's the point of an open door policy if inside the open door sits a closed mind?
captoveur 03 Jun 21, 15:07Post
I give it a 50/50 chance of resulting in actual deliveries
I like my coffee how I like my women: Black, bitter, and preferably fair trade.
ShanwickOceanic (netAirspace FAA) 03 Jun 21, 16:48Post
Yeah, Aerion had orders too, and Airbus involved ( {rotfl} ), and look how that turned out:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... rion-folds
My friend and I applied for airline jobs in Australia, but they didn't Qantas.
DXing 03 Jun 21, 20:28Post
That's a shame about Aerion. I had hopes for that one. Hope that one day someone with deep pockets can revive the project and bring it to fruition. The artist rendering of the United SST just re-enforces the need to redo the UNITED on the side.
What's the point of an open door policy if inside the open door sits a closed mind?
IFEMaster (Project Dark Overlord & Founding Member) 03 Jun 21, 21:25Post
ShanwickOceanic wrote:Yeah, Aerion had orders too, and Airbus involved ( {rotfl} ), and look how that turned out:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... rion-folds


There is one significant difference: Boom have already rolled out their scale-unit prototype. I don't recall Aerion getting that far. And when I do some digging on who Boom's internal movers and shakers are, I have more optimism that Overture might actually make it to delivery (albeit not on the current planned delivery timeline).
"Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds." - Albert Einstein
DXing 05 Jun 21, 02:39Post
Since the trip time would be under 4 hours one way, does it become a turn vs. a layover? That would cause some heartburn among the crew who enjoy the time off overseas.

There was also talk of the express partners saying that since it seats only 68...scope clause kicks in and the E170 crews would get to fly it.
What's the point of an open door policy if inside the open door sits a closed mind?
ShanwickOceanic (netAirspace FAA) 05 Jun 21, 12:36Post
BA Concorde was crewed by short-haul staff, funnily enough.
My friend and I applied for airline jobs in Australia, but they didn't Qantas.
DXing 16 Aug 22, 15:19Post
A second airline has committed to buying Booms supersonics. That's got to help the financial end of the business. Hopefully the engineering side is just as up to speed.

American Airlines has agreed to purchase 20 supersonic Overture planes from Boom Supersonic, the companies announced Tuesday.

The deal is the second firm order in the last two years for Boom, still years from building its first commercial airplane. United Airlines made a commitment last year to buy 15 Overture jets.


https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/16/american-airlines-agrees-to-buy-20-supersonic-planes-from-boom.html
What's the point of an open door policy if inside the open door sits a closed mind?
captoveur 22 Aug 22, 13:38Post
When Boom goes bust with zero deliveries and nothing beyond a mock-up to show for it, I predict some epic investigations and jail time for executives.

This whole thing feels very sketchy.
I like my coffee how I like my women: Black, bitter, and preferably fair trade.
JLAmber (netAirspace ATC & Founding Member) 22 Aug 22, 18:54Post
captoveur wrote:When Boom goes bust with zero deliveries and nothing beyond a mock-up to show for it, I predict some epic investigations and jail time for executives.

This whole thing feels very sketchy.


^ What he said. Has anyone checked on the whereabouts of our old friend Baby Branson lately?
A million great ideas...
paul mcallister 23 Aug 22, 22:31Post
I still find it hard to believe they choose the name " Boom " for an aircraft company.
DXing 09 Sep 22, 02:11Post
Might be done for. RR has decided not to pursue building a power plant for them. Whether it was for technical or internal financial reasons is not clear. I've read stories to both.

https://airwaysmag.com/rolls-royce-boom-supersonic/
What's the point of an open door policy if inside the open door sits a closed mind?
captoveur 09 Sep 22, 15:24Post
DXing wrote:Might be done for. RR has decided not to pursue building a power plant for them. Whether it was for technical or internal financial reasons is not clear. I've read stories to both.

https://airwaysmag.com/rolls-royce-boom-supersonic/


Annnnnd... There it is
I like my coffee how I like my women: Black, bitter, and preferably fair trade.
DXing 09 Sep 22, 21:59Post
But the blame lays on RR not Boom. Boom was moving forward and had signed AA to opt in on frames. Sounds like RR has some in house financial problems. It'd be nice if they could find a manufacturer to work with them.
What's the point of an open door policy if inside the open door sits a closed mind?
ShanwickOceanic (netAirspace FAA) 10 Sep 22, 18:39Post
DXing wrote:Sounds like RR has some in house financial problems.

Shades of TriStar there....
My friend and I applied for airline jobs in Australia, but they didn't Qantas.
IFEMaster (Project Dark Overlord & Founding Member) 12 Sep 22, 22:47Post
captoveur wrote:
DXing wrote:Might be done for. RR has decided not to pursue building a power plant for them. Whether it was for technical or internal financial reasons is not clear. I've read stories to both.

https://airwaysmag.com/rolls-royce-boom-supersonic/


Annnnnd... There it is


Not necessarily. I gather the RFQ and engagements with RR were for R&D purposes only, not to build prototype or production engines. Anecdotally, I have a contact that's involved with Boom at a sub-contractor level, and I believe that both GE and P&W had/have similar R&D contracts, and are still engaged in that work.

Sounds to me like perhaps it could be a bit of RR's financial struggles and the simple process of eliminating manufacturing options?
"Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds." - Albert Einstein
miamiair (netAirspace FAA) 13 Sep 22, 09:00Post
IFEMaster wrote:Sounds to me like perhaps it could be a bit of RR's financial struggles and the simple process of eliminating manufacturing options?


The warranty issues with the Trent 900/1000 has been kicking RR's ass.
And let's get one thing straight. There's a big difference between a pilot and an aviator. One is a technician; the other is an artist in love with flight. — E. B. Jeppesen
 

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

LEFT

RIGHT
CONTENT